To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account or want to create one to read two commentaries for free?
Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Richard N. Haass, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, previously served as Director of Policy Planning for the US State Department (2001-2003), and was President George W. Bush's special envoy to Northern Ireland and Coordinator for the Future of Afghanistan. He is the author of The World: A Brief Introduction.

Mr. Haass demonstrates how the American foreign policy establishment “blob” is stuck in its arrogant, condescending views of Asians, a view that is apparently permeating our congress. Rather than concoct a historical movie that depicts scary relationships in Asia, the blob should adopt the new reality: China’s mature, focused and patient government will continue to develop their economy and those of its neighbors and countries along the belt and road, and there is nothing that America and the West can do about it. Second, Asians are smart people and can and will resolve their differences without American help. Third, America’s hard power is virtually useless against the Chinese and probably the North Koreans, because they have nuclear weapons and will not tolerate an attack and certainly will resist losing a war with America.

So, America’s foreign policy establishment will do well to change its focus on creating adversarial relations with Asians, particularly the Chinese, and help figure out how America can best fit into this new reality.

Mr. Duyeon Kim says, "The United States' deterrence record is spotty vis-a-vis North Korea...(Can North Korea Be Deterred? Asia Unbound/Council on Foreign Relations/July 17, 2019)"https://www.cfr.org/blog/can-north-korea-be-deterred

The theory of nuclear deterrence was developed during the US-Russian Cold War. The theory is abstract like mathematics and should have been as universally applicable as mathematical theories are, but the fact is that it is not so abstract as mathematics and so its validity, if it had any validity, rests on concrete contexts. If the United States had had to work out a theory in the confrontation with Korea or China (both Confucianist countries),it would have come out with a different one than we have.

Soviet Russia was a conservative country in the sense that it wanted to preserve international status quo after having Eastern Europe as a buffer zone. Moreover Russians deemed themselves European; they wanted to shake off the Tartars' yoke and recapture and regain the contact with Europe that had been lost during the Mongols' rule.China and North Korea are not status quo countries; they are revionist countries because the world as it should be is not yet realized; Korean culture is more Confucianist than Chinese culture; the right and correct world order should be, in their moralistic thinking, China at the top of the world; the next most glorious country of the next importance in the whold world is Korea as "The Chosun (Yi) Dynasty (1392~1910), which managed its country, Korea, by paying the utmost courtesy to China and following China as a model state, gradually increased its confidence and regarded itself as having the same characteristics as China. Eventually, the Chosun Dynasty came to regard itself as a 'little China' (Sonfa Oh, What makes Korea insult Japan, Hikaruland, Tokyo, 2017, p145)" Korea began to walk backward in retrogression.

Mr. Kim may not seem to go so far as to say the US policy of deterrence has completely failed, but it is obvious it did not make success. It was a complete failure because North Korea has been engaged in the production of nuclear weapons for as long as about thirty years with impunity; it has carried out many provocative acts like sinking or capturing South Korean or US ships and killing South Korean and American soldiers. The United States had not known it was dealing with a country totally different in policy and strategy from Russia. The US policy of deterrence was like swinging at a ball that was not pitched by North Korea; it was battling against a windmill.North Korea did not play the game of deterrence but it was as if it was playing it, because the United States has been deterred as "due to the risks involved, to this day no American administration has considered the use of a compellence strategy (Mr. Kim)." Pyongyang has not been deterred but Washington has been.

When "deterrence has failed...the question becomes one of compellence－persuading or forcing an adversary to give up something it already possess or to terminate an ongoing action(s)...Compellence is harder to execute than deterrence because it requires persuading an adversary to change its existing behavior (e.g., taking an action it otherwise would not take) and a credible committment to act against the adversary by imposing costs (e.g., threat to inflict punishment) in the event the adversary refuses to comply (e.g., following through on the threat)....(Mr. Kim)"

While the United States and its allies are playing the game of deterrence, North Korea is not playing it. When someone against whom deterrence is directed is not playing the game, the one who intends to deter is playing fool. North Korea is no fool. It has been watching most attentively and calculating most mercilessly what it can do toward the status of a nuclear power in a given situation and enviornment after another.A nuclear North Korea will not be a satiated status quo power cooperating with international society. It will then go on to try to absorb the souther half and extend its infulence beyond, coveting the status of a little Middle Kingdom if not the Middle Kingdom, and subjugating externally as many people and as much area as possible. The question is not "Can North Korea be deterred?" but what means do the United States and its allies have to force the North to give up its nuclear weapons. Perhaps Kim and conspirators are waiting very patiently till the US gives up making them hand over their nuclear weapons.

Asía is one more piece in a global picture of instability. It is difficult to find any region that does not have significant stability issues, whether arising from economic, geopolitical, or environmental issues. With the increasing stability issues, the economic capacity, and geopolitical will to deploy resources is lacking. We are looking at a monumental transformation of the world order.

Your excellent piece covers so much territory, Richard, that I'm compelled to address it paragraph by paragraph.

1. Indeed, history can be understood as a snapshot or as a vignette of a larger history. Few seem to understand the overarching significance of your statement.

2. I agree with your characterization of East Asia and the Pacific as a peaceful, prosperous and as a geopolitically stable region in the here and now. There are irritations, however -- and they are either nothing, or they are potential catalysts on the quick path to Armageddon -- depending on how these challenges are met by the actors involved. How it all unfolds depends upon the quality of the politics, not the volume of the shouting. This cannot be emphasized enough.

3. President Trump, surprisingly perhaps, changed the entire narrative with regard to the Korea/North Korea situation when he (impulsively) met with the DPRK's Kim Jong-un. There is now a 50% chance of success -- if you judge success as peace and prosperity between the ROK and the DPRK, as I do -- compared to a 0% chance of success only a few years ago.

4. Why would Kim Jong-un denuclearize? It would be the stupidest thing in the world for him to do after watching what happened to Libya and Syria -- two nation states that voluntarily and unilaterally gave-up their WMD weapons in exchange for the promise of stronger ties between their countries and the West! It would be sheer lunacy for DPRK to voluntarily and unilaterally give up their WMD's if that's how it's going to go. Bad, bad, bad, diplomacy by the West in regards to Libya and Syria. Shameful and counterproductive in the extreme. Possibly the worst thing the West has done since the Bay of Pigs or Salvadore Allende.

5. Shortsighted actors on all sides continue to fan the issue of the so-called 'comfort women' of WWII, many of whom were never returned after the war's end, indeed, many continued to be forced prostitutes for decades after the war and only their remains were returned to ROK or DPRK (as they case may be) after they had passed away. However grievous the actions of those in a previous century who abducted and used those Korean and North Korean women, that cannot be allowed to compromise a long-term peace process between ROK and DPRK. Far too much is at stake. Indeed, nuclear Armageddon could occur if all the pieces were to fall. Arguing and blaming today's Japanese leaders for things that were done in a previous century (two Japanese emperors ago!) is as ridiculous as arguing with and blaming Germany's present leaders and citizens for the things done by their great-grandfathers. Lunacy! The entire issue of the 'comfort women' cannot be allowed to derail a peace process between nuclear-armed countries, as badly as we feel for them and their families.

6. These Hong Kong demonstrators are so obviously Western-led, Western-backed, and Western-financed. Their methods are 100% Western and they are obviously led by the 'poor losers' of the return of Hong Kong to China. Get over it, people! Hong Kong *was* a part of the British Empire for a time. The British Empire is gone and won't be returning. It died on account of it's own harsh hand in dealing with Asians (Opium Wars, anyone?) and Africans (slavery, anyone?) and from fighting a rising and militant Germany in WWI and WWII. Only lazy intellectualism allows some to think that the loss of Hong Kong to China is China's fault. Like Great Britain, the Soviet Union, France and other countries that were invaded or attacked in WWII, China was a victim of the Axis Powers, not a contributor. Leave China alone. The UK willingly ceded Hong Kong to China (as it rightly should have) in 1997, to take full effect in 1999, so stop having 'seller's remorse' already. Such idiocy!

7. China's Uighurs are a concern. If they were free to leave China (I don't think they are, but I could be wrong as it's been a long time since I was there) then I would have no problem with what China is doing with the Uighurs. Free schooling, free accommodation, some jobs are available. Indeed, China is trying its best to convert an unproductive region into loyal, hardworking, and culturally harmonious population. Now, by Western standards, it may look overbearing and mean-spirited, but what is China's alternative? Allow the Uighurs to increase their population significantly over time... and then try to solve the problem decades from now? So, what China is doing is pragmatic and necessary, but it isn't pretty to Western eyes and ears. Still, China should allow as many of the Uighurs to move out of China and provide the transport for them to do so. Anywhere along the One Road might be seen as a better future for some of them, compared to staying in what are essentially, forced culturalization centres.

In regard to the Paracel Islands and other islands in the South China Sea that China is trying to acquire, or has already installed very minimal defenses on some of them, China is as responsible as any other country (perhaps more) for the $5 trillion worth of goods that pass through those waters every year. It would be irresponsible for China to sit back and allow other countries or non-state actors to seize control of those islands, and it would be very difficult to dislodge them, once they were firmly entrenched. China is simply doing its part to add security to that waterway, to the benefit of all trading nations whose ships pass through those waters.

8. America and its allies need to realize that it is now the 21st-century, and that 20th-century thinking doesn't belong here. Taiwan is a part of China now, in the 21st-century. Leave it alone. You can't win. It isn't worth one cent of propaganda value. Forget about it. People on about Taiwan, look like children who no longer want a certain toy that they once cherished, but won't let anyone else have it either. Very bad form.

9. If Taiwan were to fully join-up with China, it would, in effect, become the Trojan Horse for democracy in China -- in a way that all the shrill tweets and diplomatic maneuvers in the world could never be. Taiwan's democracy works so well, that China would be forced to adopt many of Taiwan's excellence in government into its own government. The approach of some towards China/Taiwan couldn't be more wrong-headed if you want a more democratic China with more internal 'checks and balances' in their government. It's astonishing how wrong some people have gotten it. Although they don't understand this; They should want Taiwan to become fully, 100% joined-up with China to further their own goals of a more meritorious and more democratic China.

10. Neither side should be crossing any lines. Taiwan should become part of China in a very organic way without any party forcing the issue, and without any party trying to prevent it from happening. Anyone who is doing more than that has too much time on their hands and should have their wrists slapped. Just let it be. What is best to happen, will happen organically. Let it alone.

11. Overall, the U.S. has been a good influence in Asia since the end of WWII, in stark contrast to its influence previous to WWII in the region. However, the U.S. should curtail its rhetoric and allow things to develop naturally, while keeping the DPRK's worst moments and intentions in check via a strong, U.S.-led, multinational effort that can act when necessary, and simultaneously, keep the chirping down when the DPRK isn't acting badly.

12. What makes Trump valuable is that he is at first a disrupter, and then a conciliator. A breath of fresh air -- as long as he doesn't forget to be the ultimate conciliator at the halfway mark through the game. And considering his chances of reelection, he's more than halfway through his time in the White House. So, time to wrap-up what can still be wrapped-up, Mr. President, and it's time to salvage what can still be salvaged, Mr. President, or your legacy will be that of a 'disrupter' (only) and anyone can be that, but not a 'fixer' in the geopolitical world which astonishingly few people have ever been in history.

13. All of it depends upon the quality of the leaders, not the volume, as I said at the outset. From here on, what occurs that is good will be down to good vision and good leadership, and what occurs that is bad will be down to poor vision and poor leadership. And no amount of press controls will hide what gets done well and what turns into a disaster for the simple reason that all of this has played out in the media, and it is too late to suddenly think about failing and hiding the evidence.

As always, the only way forward for all nations, is via a 'Win-Win' mindset. Either we have leaders who are up for that, or we are doomed as a species. There is no other way, now, in the 21st-century to do anything other than succeed. Such are our challenges. We cannot fail. Failure means death of the planet and everyone on it. Therefore, will to succeed and don't accept anything but 'Win-Win'.

As always, very best regards to you, Richard. A great pleasure to read your words at Project Syndicate!

Your excellent piece covers so much territory, Richard, that I'm compelled to address it paragraph by paragraph.

1. Indeed, history can be understood as a snapshot or as a vignette of a larger history. Few seem to understand the overarching significance of your statement.

2. I agree with your characterization of East Asia and the Pacific as a peaceful, prosperous and as a geopolitically stable region in the here and now. There are irritations, however -- and they are either nothing, or they are potential catalysts on the quick path to Armageddon -- depending on how these challenges are met by the actors involved. How it all unfolds depends upon the quality of the politics, not the volume of the shouting. This cannot be emphasized enough.

3. President Trump, surprisingly perhaps, changed the entire narrative with regard to the Korea/North Korea situation when he (impulsively) met with the DPRK's Kim Jong-un. There is now a 50% chance of success -- if you judge success as peace and prosperity between the ROK and the DPRK, as I do.

4. Why would Kim Jong-un denuclearize? It would be the stupidest thing in the world for him to do, after watching what happened to Libya and Syria -- two nation states that voluntarily and unilaterally gave up their WMD weapons in exchange for the promise of stronger ties between their countries and the West! It would be sheer lunacy for DPRK to voluntarily and unilaterally give up their WMD's if that's how it's going to go. Bad, bad, bad, diplomacy by the West in regards to Libya and Syria. Shameful and counterproductive in the extreme. Possibly the worst thing the West has done since the Bay of Pigs or Salvadore Allende.

5. Shortsighted actors on all sides continue to fan the so-called 'comfort women' of WWII, many of whom were never returned after the war's end, indeed, many continued to be forced prostitutes for decades after the war and only their remains were returned to ROK or DPRK (as they case may be) after they had passed away. However grievous the actions of those in a previous century who abducted and used those Korean and North Korean women, that cannot be allowed to compromise a long-term peace process between ROK and DPRK. Far too much is at stake. Indeed, nuclear Armageddon could occur if all the pieces were to fall. Arguing and blaming today's Japanese leaders for things that were done in a previous century (two Japanese emperors ago!) is as ridiculous as arguing with and blaming Germany's present leaders and citizens for the things done by their great-grandfathers. Lunacy! The entire issue of the 'comfort women' cannot be allowed to derail a peace process between nuclear-armed countries, as badly as we feel for their surviving families.

6. These Hong Kong demonstrators are so obviously Western-led, Western-backed, and Western-financed. Their methods are 100% Western and they are obviously led by the 'poor losers' of the return of Hong Kong to China. Get over it, people! Hong Kong *was* a part of the British Empire for a time. The British Empire is gone and is not returning. It died on account of it's own harsh hand in dealing with Asians (Opium Wars, anyone?) and Africans (slavery, anyone?) and from fighting a rising and militant Germany in WWI and WWII. Only lazy intellectualism allows the most stunned of actors to think that the loss of Hong Kong to China is China's fault. Like Great Britain, the Soviet Union, France and other countries that were invaded or attacked in WWII, China was a victim of the Axis Powers, not a contributor. Leave China alone. The UK willingly ceded Hong Kong to China (as it rightly should have) in 1997, to take full effect in 1999, so stop having 'seller's remorse' already. Such idiocy!

7. China's Uighurs are a concern. If they were free to leave China (I don't think they are, but I could be wrong, it's been a long time since I was there) then I would have no problem with what China is doing with the Uighurs. Free schooling, free accommodation, some jobs are available. Indeed, China is trying its best to convert an unproductive region into loyal, hardworking, and culturally harmonious population. Now, by Western standards, it may look overbearing and mean-spirited, but what is China's alternative? Allow the Uighurs to increase their population significantly over time... and then try to solve the problem decades from now? So, what China is doing is pragmatic and necessary, but it isn't pretty to Western eyes and ears. Still, China should allow as many of the Uighurs to move out of China and provide the transport for them to do so. Anywhere along the One Road might be seen as a better future for some of them, compared to staying in what are essentially, forced culturalization centres.

In regard to the Paracel Islands and other islands in the South China Sea that China is trying to acquire, or has already installed very minimal defenses on some of them, China is as responsible as any other country (perhaps more) for the $5 trillion worth of goods that pass through those waters every year. It would be irresponsible for China to sit back and allow other countries or non-state actors to seize control of those islands, and it would be very difficult to dislodge them, once they were firmly entrenched. China is simply doing its part to add security to that waterway, to the benefit of all trading nations whose ships pass through those waters.

8. America and its allies need to realize that it is now the 21st-century, and that 20th-century thinking doesn't belong here. Taiwan is a part of China now, in the 21st-century. Leave it alone. You can't win. It isn't worth one cent of propaganda value. Forget about it. People on about Taiwan, look like children who no longer want a certain toy that they once cherished, but won't let anyone else have it either. Very bad form.

9. If Taiwan were to fully join-up with China, it would, in effect, become the Trojan Horse for democracy in China -- in a way that all the shrill tweets and diplomatic maneuvers in the world could never be. Taiwan's democracy works so well, that China would be forced to adopt many of Taiwan's excellence in government into its own government. The approach of some Americans and others towards China/Taiwan couldn't be more wrong-headed if you want a more democratic China with more internal 'checks and balances' in their government. It's astonishing how wrong some people have gotten it. Although they don't understand this; They should want Taiwan to become fully, 100% joined-up with China to further their own goals of a more meritorious and more democratic China.

10. Neither side should be crossing any lines. Through osmosis, Taiwan should become part of China in a very organic way, without any party forcing the issue, and without any party trying to prevent it from happening. Anyone who is doing any more than that has too much time on their hands and should have their wrists slapped. Just let it be. What is best to happen, will happen organically. Let it alone.

11. Overall, the U.S. has been a good influence in Asia since the end of WWII, in stark contrast to its influence previous to WWII in the region. However, the U.S. should curtail its rhetoric and allow things to develop naturally, while keeping the DPRK's worst moments and intentions in check via a strong, U.S.-led, multinational effort that can act when necessary, and simultaneously, keep the chirping down when the DPRK isn't acting badly.

12. What makes Trump valuable is that he is at first a disrupter, and then a conciliator. A breath of fresh air -- as long as he doesn't forget to be the ultimate conciliator at the halfway mark through the game. And considering his chances of reelection, he's more than halfway through his time in the White House. So, time to wrap-up what can still be wrapped-up, Mr. President, and it's time to salvage what can still be salvaged, Mr. President, or your legacy will be that of a 'disrupter' (only) and anyone can be that, but not a 'fixer' in the geopolitical world which astonishingly few people have ever been in history.

13. All of it depends upon the quality of the leaders, not the volume. As I said at the outset. From here on, what is good will be down to good vision and good leadership, and what occurs that is bad will be down to poor vision and poor leadership. And no amount of press controls will hide what gets done well and what is a disaster for the simple reason that all of this has played out in the media, and it is too late to suddenly think about failing and hiding the evidence.

As always, the only way forward for all nations, is via a 'Win-Win' mindset. Either we have the leaders who are up for that, or we are doomed as a species. There is no other way, now, in the 21st-century, to do anything other than succeed. Such are our challenges. We cannot fail. Failure means death of the planet and everyone on it. Therefore, will to succeed and don't accept anything but 'Win-Win'.

As always, very best regards to you, Richard. A great pleasure to read your words at Project Syndicate!

Haass probably does see all this as just a movie, and one whose plot can be adjusted to the viewing public's preferences. Director's cut one: the enslavement and brutal raping to the death of Korean women should be called just "abuse" to get the PG 13 rating in which Japan and Korea remain good friends to support the US containment of China. Director's cut two: China should be said to encroach on Hong Kong's freedom although no example of encroachment can be found or given. This is because the viewer already knows China is the bad guy, so if people in Hong Kong put police in the hospital it must be because of evil China (it couldn't be for the same reason that populists in the US or Europe rebel, given that the viewer's racist bias couldn't conceive these Asians as equivalent to the real people in the US and Europe). Director's cut three: Every fan of international intrigue films knows that the evil genius behind China must have some diabolical aggression against innocent good guys up his sleeve. It can't be that he is frightened of the vastly superior US force and its rapid series of illegal actions (including extraditing the daughter of an arch enemy tech company's founder on trumped up charges) and is trying to circle his wagons. Bad guys, particularly Asian (i.e., not real people) bad guys, don't have those sorts of human reactions.

Richard N. Haass points out the peril in East Asia and the Pacific that could pose a risk to prosperity and political stability in the region, which is home to some of the world’s largest economies: China ranks second, Japan third, and South Korea eleventh. The author says a “snapshot” of East Asia shows “stable societies, growing economies, and robust alliances.” But as a “moving picture” he finds the sequences “scary,” marked by protests in Hong Kong, hostility and brinkmanship in Taiwan, Japan and South Korea etc. No doubt North Korea’s nuclear ambition poses a security threat to Japan and South Korea, which are America’s core but estranged allies. Yet China is also the source of conflict in the region, which is a tangled web of unresolved disputes and rising tensions. China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are at the heart of the “most economically successful part of the world,” but so are old antagonisms that poison domestic politics and foreign relations. It explains why the author believes the progress of the entire region runs the risk of falling apart. Despite economic boom the region is haunted by ghosts of a troubled past and torn by historical grievances. Fuelled by nationalism China has been raising territorial claims in the East and South China Seas, seeking to reintegrate Hong Kong and unify Taiwan with the mainland. Japan sees Beijing as its main national security threat, while China and South Korea harbour deep resentment about the atrocities the Imperial Japan committed on their soil before its capitulisation in 1945. Tensions and rivalries in East Asia have their roots in history. China, Japan and South Korea. have never come to terms with the past. Japan has been reluctant to acknowledge its war crimes. China and South Korea still dwell on a traumatic episode related to Japan’s invasion, occupation and colonisation of their countries. Twentieth-century wars continue to influence perceptions and behaviour across the region.The Trump administration shows no interest in easing tensions in East Asia, and its allies in the region are not spared from its tariff war. Eager to denuclearise North Korea, Trump has pitted South Korea against Japan, whose prime minister, Shinzo Abe resents South Korean president, Moon Jae-in for the “bromance” between Trump and Kim Jong-un. Last year South Korea’s Supreme Court ordered Japanese companies to pay compensation for forced labour during colonisation. Recently, a South Korean court ordered the seizure and distribution of a Japanese company’s assets, which crossed Tokyo’s red line. In retaliation Japan tightened controls on exports of high-tech materials to South Korea. Trump fails to understand that the security challenges posed by China and North Korea requires the US to ensure that Japan and South Korea can maintain unity as reliable allies in Northeast Asia. Obama helped reconcile Japan with South Korea in 2014, knowing the significance of alliance adhesion for the US strategy in the region. Due to the latest tensions, trilateral defence cooperation needed to counter North Korean aggression is at stake. Capitalising on this rift, Beijing and Pyongyang have - separately and in parallel - tried to drive a wedge between South Korea, Japan and the US during periods of tension among the three.Xi Jinping has assumed a more active and aggressive posture throughout Asia, and would love to see the departure of US troops from South Korea, allowing him to coerce Taiwan and to establish effective control over East Asia. China benefits from the Japan-South Korea standoff, amid tensions with the US. Last October Xi hosted Shinzo Abe in an effort to pull Japan away from the US, validating the Chinese belief that Japan needs China more than the US. Asia accounts for nearly two-thirds of global economic growth. High tensions would destabilise regional trade and global supply chains. Under normal circumstances a US president would persuade America’s allies not to let their disputes over history to undermine security cooperation, but to focus more on China and the North Korean nuclear threat. But not Trump.

typical western view on things, seeing things in a segmented, isolated view as one problem is caused by one, single incident or development. That’s very far from the truth where Eastern Asia society view things in a holistic approach. The US has certainly played a villain in this so-called “scary movie”. With the current administration, the momentum will continue.

Perhaps the most dangerous development is China’s assertiveness on the world stage and its challenge to America’s predominance. Washington and Beijing have to tread carefully on how this confrontation can be peacefully resolved. The challenge is great, because history does not augur well for the future.https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

Historically, the female has always been the ultimate pawn and toy of the male ego, regardless of national or racial identities. Without international law acknowledging the female as equal to the male, the maneuvering between males with the bodies of females will escalate. If international law acknowledges the female as equal, then completely new dynamics will change the game. The change will not necessarily make anything better for anyone. The only change that makes any difference is recognition and acceptance of fair and equal social contracts under equitable laws. Compliance and enforcing controls of the law-abiding and non-law-abiding allows social existence to be more or less tolerable for the many or the few. Right now, the few are the ones determining the rules of the game to the detriment of the many, including the few. The few, in their ignorance do not realize they are ignorant, which will cause increasing action to every human being's detriment, especially their own.

No East Asian societies are stable, perhaps except for Japan, Australia and New Zealand.

Mr. Tae Yong-ho, a North Korean minister in London, who defected to South Korea, came to Japan a few weeks ago and had an interview with NHK, the Japanese version of BBC. He said that Kim Jong-un was sure of riding out the present level of international sanctions; Kim would most tenatiously hold on to his nuclear weapons. Mr. Tae said that international society needed to ramp up and strengthen the sanctions and the level.

That Japanese kidnapped and forced Korean women and girls to work in prostitution is of course a big lie. "On August 14, 2014, almost 32 years after its first story on Yoshida's now widely discredited stories had been published, Asahi Shinbun (a big, influential Japanese newspaper) retracted all previous articles on the matter...In a predictable fashon, however, Asahi maintained that at the time the articles were published, it was 'unalbe to uncover the falseness' of Yoshida's stories (Marshall Wordsworth, Inconvenient and Uncomfortble." I would like interested people here to read readers comments on it, amazon usa. Ikuhiko Hata/Comfort Women and Sex in the Battle Zone is more comprehensive.South Korea had more comfort women, about fifty thousand as against at most twenty thousand Japanese, at the time of the Korean War. Some of them were actually forced to work in prostitution or paid no salaries. "The world does not know it, because the South Korean government keeps hushed and South Korean mass media do not report about it," as I said in my (Michi's) comment, American Humanism, on Chinese Comfort Women, amazon usa. Readers can read some details by a Japanese expert, "Comfort Women Issue in Sharper Focus" in Japanese and English at the following address.

http://www.seisaku-center.net/node/840

Korean society is more Confucianist than Chinese society. At a deep layer of the Korean mind is the belief, which comes from its history, that the best culture or country in the world is China and the second best is Korea. "Anti-Japanese ideology in South Korea has evolved over the years. The public has changed its arguments to suit its needs and circumstances at different times. This book (Getting Over It! Why Korea Needs to Stop Bashing Japan) argues that the narrow egoism and prejudice of the anti-Japan view reflects Korea's history and its racial characteristics. The back bone of South Korea's anti-Japan ideology is a capricious and opportunistic egoism aimed at satisfying its cliquish mentality, for which Korean leaders often resorted to fabrication of historical events (Sonfa Oh, Getting Over It!)" Ms. Sonfa Oh is a South Korean born and naturalized Japanese citizen. She came to Japan as a student, deeply imbued with the Korea's anti-Japanese education. Her book, What makes Korea insult Japan, tells how she gradually came to shed her deep-ingrained myth. She is a persona non grata of democratic South Korea.

New Comment

It appears that you have not yet updated your first and last name. If you would like to update your name, please do so here.

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Mass protests over racial injustice, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a sharp economic downturn have plunged the United States into its deepest crisis in decades. Will the public embrace radical, systemic reforms, or will the specter of civil disorder provoke a conservative backlash?

For democratic countries like the United States, the COVID-19 crisis has opened up four possible political and socioeconomic trajectories. But only one path forward leads to a destination that most people would want to reach.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.